I was watching a game over the weekend and the announcers were talking about hitting away from the shift.   Seems someone did it and it fell in for a crucial hit(wish I had been playing closer attention so I'd know more details).    After the game, the manager that employed the shift was asked if maybe he'd have been better off playing straight up.    His response was something along the lines of "The data supports the shift."

This sort of got me thinking.  I agree it's always possible to do the right thing and get the wrong result.    But, if the trend is "The data supports.....", will the manager's role on game day become meaningless?   Sure he has to write out the line-up but if he's just going with the data, can't some computer nerd just run the numbers and fill out a line-up?    Wouldn't same computer nerd be able to decide on PH, relief pitchers, SB attempts, etc, etc by running the same numbers?

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/20/2015 11:19:00 AM (view original):
I was watching a game over the weekend and the announcers were talking about hitting away from the shift.   Seems someone did it and it fell in for a crucial hit(wish I had been playing closer attention so I'd know more details).    After the game, the manager that employed the shift was asked if maybe he'd have been better off playing straight up.    His response was something along the lines of "The data supports the shift."

This sort of got me thinking.  I agree it's always possible to do the right thing and get the wrong result.    But, if the trend is "The data supports.....", will the manager's role on game day become meaningless?   Sure he has to write out the line-up but if he's just going with the data, can't some computer nerd just run the numbers and fill out a line-up?    Wouldn't same computer nerd be able to decide on PH, relief pitchers, SB attempts, etc, etc by running the same numbers?

Yep.

Smart teams are already doing this. The manager's real job is to manage personalities, egos, and conflict.

The retardation of BL is complete!

Do you disagree? You don't seem to have much to add to this (or any) discussion.

No.  I absolutely agree that you are completely retarded.

But I will say this . . . if the manager's "real job" is to manage personalities, egos and conflict, then why do teams still hire "baseball people" as managers?

Surely, if that's all the job was, they should be able to find some non-baseball people who are much better qualified to "manage personalities, egos and conflict" than baseball people, and give them a computer that will spit out lineups and advise on pinch hitters and pitching changes, etc.

Sounds like a job for Dr. Phil.  Do you want Dr. Phil running your favorite team?  Why or why not?

I agree.   Just get some sports psychologist to handle that part of the job.    He/she can report to Computer Geek with "Bill is feeling unloved because you never let him play against lefties.    His mental health would be so much better if you'd give him a few AB against one."

It makes sense to hire baseball guys. They know first hand what the players are going through and have credibility. Deciding the best time to steal, taking advantage of platoon splits, and setting defenses based on spray chart data may not be things they are great at. So front offices set those strategic parameters and managers manage the players.

FWIW, I do think data has a place.   If Bob can't hit lefties, he can't hit lefties.   I don't really care if Old School Manager thinks he's got a couple of good swings against them recently.   Bob has 2300 AB vs lefties and he's hitting .127.     But there still has to be a "feel" to the ebb/flow of games.    Leaving a guy out there because his PC is 90 and he's only thrown 72 isn't an automatic call.    Bringing in a PH because he's 12-19 lifetime against a pitcher isn't an auto call.   Baseball is still played on a field by people.

Any manager that just looks at a stat sheet probably shouldn't have a job.     Which is why "The data supports the shift" guy should probably be watched closely.   He's not managing anymore.   He's just doing what the stat guy says he should do.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/20/2015 1:04:00 PM (view original):
Any manager that just looks at a stat sheet probably shouldn't have a job.     Which is why "The data supports the shift" guy should probably be watched closely.   He's not managing anymore.   He's just doing what the stat guy says he should do.

Pretty sure the stat guys are his bosses.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/20/2015 1:01:00 PM (view original):
FWIW, I do think data has a place.   If Bob can't hit lefties, he can't hit lefties.   I don't really care if Old School Manager thinks he's got a couple of good swings against them recently.   Bob has 2300 AB vs lefties and he's hitting .127.     But there still has to be a "feel" to the ebb/flow of games.    Leaving a guy out there because his PC is 90 and he's only thrown 72 isn't an automatic call.    Bringing in a PH because he's 12-19 lifetime against a pitcher isn't an auto call.   Baseball is still played on a field by people.

That's a bit of a straw man.

No one is deciding anything based on 19 plate appearances. And we're really talking about parameters for the manager to work with, not hard rules without regard to the situation.

I disagree.  I think "data supports the shift" guy is ok.  Maybe it wasn't the best way to put things in a press conference, but if he'd said the same thing differently "if you look at this guys ABs for the past 3 years, you'll see he's only hit against the shift 27 times, so he doesn't do it very much.  We got burned this time, but I still think it was the right thing to do," or even just leave the numbers out and say he doesn't do it very much, and it sounds ok.  For some reason the word "data" and "stats" are approaching profane for the old-school baseball guys.  But I think you can shift against some guys almost every time regardless of situation, because they just don't demonstrate the ability to compensate for it.

I would argue the main "baseball" function of the manager is pitcher management.  Obviously the pitching and bullpen coaches can help with this, but somebody does have to know when your guy just doesn't have it, if something's off with his mechanics, or if he's just gassed early.  And obviously you could pick up on something in the defense or the pitcher's mechanics and call for a steal, but the base coaches can also help a lot with that.  There's so much data available now, just making moves because "you had a feeling" doesn't make sense anymore.  Looking at the stat sheet with a general knowledge of the game is most of the job, perhaps unfortunately, but at the end of the day it's going to work better than managing by gut without the numbers.

I suppose wording is what makes me question what he's doing.  Any manager not looking at the numbers, or having a guy do it for him, is probably missing out on some info he could use.  But it seems to me that just automatically shifting because "the data supports it" seems like mindless managing.    And I agree that there are more than a handful that should be shifted against without hesitation.   Just not sure I need data to tell me Texiera and Ortiz are going to pull the ball.

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/20/2015 1:26:00 PM (view original):
I suppose wording is what makes me question what he's doing.  Any manager not looking at the numbers, or having a guy do it for him, is probably missing out on some info he could use.  But it seems to me that just automatically shifting because "the data supports it" seems like mindless managing.    And I agree that there are more than a handful that should be shifted against without hesitation.   Just not sure I need data to tell me Texiera and Ortiz are going to pull the ball.

It's the opposite of mindless. He (or someone) looked at the data, determined that the shift was the best call, and employed it. It obviously won't always work but, in the long run, it will pay off.